Quote:
Originally Posted by moeloubani
I think you mean Lebanon lol. Hezbollah is a political group that is against Israel, that's why it is labeled a terrorist organization by the US and Israel. The rest of the world don't see them that way and to the rest of the world they are the legitimate democratically elected Lebanese government. They are only radicals from the American point of view in that they fight for what they want instead of doing nothing. If you really think about it Americans are way, way, way more radical than they are about trying to push their ways on the world.
The idea isn't what leaders they elect, if they elect radicals good for them, if they elect moderates good for them. The idea is it isn't up to us who they elect, and if they elect someone who doesn't think along the same lines as we do then we have to work with them and come to a compromise. Not just kill them. That's what's important, that democracy happens, not that Americans are happy.
|
lol you are right. It was Lebanon. . . too much allergy medicine for me today
While we can argue whether Hezbollah is a terrorist group or not, there is no changing that they were elected so, like you say, we have to either learn to deal with them and try to compromise. The problem is many radicals do not have any interest in compromise.
I have said for a long time there are four main problems with the middle east. 1. many of the countries have a huge separation of wealth.There are a few very rich people, a lot of very poor people an a very small middle class. 2. They have a huge lack of education. With an undereducated society people tend to believe what they are told. 3. They have a lack of information. The governments control the flow of information to the people and keep them in the dark. 4. Many of these countries treat women like 3rd class citizens.
Until they fix these problems it won't matter who they elect, they will always have unrest and turmoil. Fixing those problems won't solve their every ill, but it can go a long way. They need to look at Qatar. The leadership of that country recognizes that they need women in positions of power and that they need an educated population and that they need outside investment into their country to create jobs and develop long term stability.
My thought is that if they elect more moderate leaders they might be more willing to help phase some of these changes in where a radical leader may be less likely. We are seeing some of this changing now. The flow of information is getting harder and harder to stop and people are demanding more from their leaders, but there is a long way to go.
just my 2 cents.